add Posted January 31, 2010 Posted January 31, 2010 [quote name='goldenchild17' date='31 January 2010 - 05:10 PM' timestamp='1264972206' post='2048412'] good move I agree. Bad timing. We don't have money for this stuff. [/quote] who is going to build them plants , and who is going the work in them plants and the energy produced will replace oil at a fraction of the cost we are paying and no blood we be spilled we can not afford, not to what is wrong with thousands of high paying construction, engineering and scientific jobs being created and sustained right here at home.
goldenchild17 Posted February 1, 2010 Posted February 1, 2010 [quote name='apparently' date='31 January 2010 - 05:25 PM' timestamp='1264980343' post='2048535'] who is going to build them plants , and who is going the work in them plants and the energy produced will replace oil at a fraction of the cost we are paying and no blood we be spilled we can not afford, not to what is wrong with thousands of high paying construction, engineering and scientific jobs being created and sustained right here at home. [/quote] good points. I won't argue it, because you're right, and I'd like to see it happen anyways. Even if it does hurt us financially short-term I think its a better investment overall.
add Posted March 14, 2010 Posted March 14, 2010 (edited) [quote name='notardillacid' date='04 March 2010 - 12:45 AM' timestamp='1267674349' post='2066334'] [/quote] care to explain, blimp-master? Edited March 14, 2010 by apparently
Didacus Posted March 14, 2010 Posted March 14, 2010 I would rather deal with 1 kg of easily controlled nuclear waste (which, btw, often becomes byproduct used for mecicine!), than deal with the 1 ton of CO2 and SO2 which float beyond control in the atmosphere which comes from fossil fuel. The sun and wind are simply unfeasable sources of energy, and water simply not abundant enough anymore.
Didacus Posted March 14, 2010 Posted March 14, 2010 [quote name='Happy_Catholic' date='22 January 2010 - 10:46 PM' timestamp='1264214798' post='2042565'] Tell that to the people of Chernobyl. While it may be an extreme example, and probably a result of poor maintenance and general stupidity, it points out how ticklish nuclear reactors can be. When something goes wrong, something REALLY goes wrong. People are greedy. People always find ways to cut corners. We're probably not far off another Chernobyl given the recent economic climate. [/quote] France produces over 80% of its power through nuclear. How many disasters have occured in France? They probably have more watts generated than any other nation in the world and yet they don't glow in the dark. And just for the fun of it, compare the electricity prices in France compared to other countries in Europe... Go ahead, I dare ya...
add Posted March 14, 2010 Posted March 14, 2010 [quote name='Didacus' date='14 March 2010 - 01:23 PM' timestamp='1268583833' post='2072910'] I would rather deal with 1 kg of easily controlled nuclear waste (which, btw, often becomes byproduct used for mecicine!), than deal with the 1 ton of CO2 and SO2 which float beyond control in the atmosphere which comes from fossil fuel. The sun and wind are simply unfeasable sources of energy, and water simply not abundant enough anymore. [/quote] ditto that
ThePenciledOne Posted March 15, 2010 Posted March 15, 2010 [quote name='Didacus' date='14 March 2010 - 01:23 PM' timestamp='1268583833' post='2072910'] I would rather deal with 1 kg of easily controlled nuclear waste (which, btw, often becomes byproduct used for mecicine!), than deal with the 1 ton of CO2 and SO2 which float beyond control in the atmosphere which comes from fossil fuel. The sun and wind are simply unfeasible sources of energy, and water simply not abundant enough anymore. [/quote] Since, obviously artifical things are always better than natural sources...
ardillacid Posted March 15, 2010 Posted March 15, 2010 [quote name='ThePenciledOne' date='14 March 2010 - 08:34 PM' timestamp='1268613244' post='2073185'] Since, obviously artifical things are always better than natural sources... [/quote] No one has said that anywhere. I'm all for natural! [IMG]http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b155/ardillacid/weed_plant.jpg[/IMG] Uranium is a naturally occurring element. Radiation is a natural phenomena. Are you posting in the right topic? Again, someone posting misconceptions instead of addressing any of the points brought up in the thread...
Laudate_Dominum Posted March 15, 2010 Posted March 15, 2010 [quote name='Didacus' date='14 March 2010 - 12:23 PM' timestamp='1268583833' post='2072910'] I would rather deal with 1 kg of easily controlled nuclear waste (which, btw, often becomes byproduct used for mecicine!), than deal with the 1 ton of CO2 and SO2 which float beyond control in the atmosphere which comes from fossil fuel. The sun and wind are simply unfeasable sources of energy, and water simply not abundant enough anymore. [/quote] Dude, read my earlier posts. Seems like you haven't heard... [spoiler] [color="#000000"]Nuclear power is kind of c[color="#000000"]rap[/color].[/color] [/spoiler] [quote name='notardillacid' date='15 March 2010 - 02:42 AM' timestamp='1268635358' post='2073384'] No one has said that anywhere. I'm all for natural! [IMG]http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b155/ardillacid/weed_plant.jpg[/IMG] Uranium is a naturally occurring element. Radiation is a natural phenomena. Are you posting in the right topic? Again, someone posting misconceptions instead of addressing any of the points brought up in the thread... [/quote] Win. +1
ThePenciledOne Posted March 16, 2010 Posted March 16, 2010 [quote name='notardillacid' date='15 March 2010 - 03:42 AM' timestamp='1268635358' post='2073384'] No one has said that anywhere. I'm all for natural! [img]http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b155/ardillacid/weed_plant.jpg[/img] Uranium is a naturally occurring element. Radiation is a natural phenomena. Are you posting in the right topic? Again, someone posting misconceptions instead of addressing any of the points brought up in the thread... [/quote] Are you trying to point out something? Uranium is natural occurring, but we still have to process it no? That makes it artificial since we ourselves have to split atoms and create the energy. So, as far as I am concerned it makes it . Last time I checked windmills and dams are just more or less set, while turbines are built and set. No real processing except maybe the conversion of the power made by the wind etc... Meanwhile, the buildings from Nuclear Power are straight up dangerous because of the radiation and the plants themselves which can only be used 50 years at a time or so, before they become unsafe are left as an eyesore. And looks as if you haven't read any of the proceeding posts dear sir. Please read a thread before you bump it.
Laudate_Dominum Posted March 16, 2010 Posted March 16, 2010 [quote name='ThePenciledOne' date='15 March 2010 - 08:03 PM' timestamp='1268697820' post='2073720'] Are you trying to point out something? Uranium is natural occurring, but we still have to process it no? That makes it artificial since we ourselves have to split atoms and create the energy. So, as far as I am concerned it makes it . Last time I checked windmills and dams are just more or less set, while turbines are built and set. No real processing except maybe the conversion of the power made by the wind etc... Meanwhile, the buildings from Nuclear Power are straight up dangerous because of the radiation and the plants themselves which can only be used 50 years at a time or so, before they become unsafe are left as an eyesore. And looks as if you haven't read any of the proceeding posts dear sir. Please read a thread before you bump it. [/quote] +1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now